RRC Archives

I think the reason behind clipping your draws on the rings, as opposed to directly on the hangers, is to prevent the hangers from spinning. The hangers on a Fixe ring anchor is bolted into the rock with the hanger placed in a straight horizontal position (compared to other hangers on the route that are placed in an angle to anticipate the direction of a fall). Clipping directly into the hangers on a fixe ring anchor setup can cause the hangers to spin in the direction of the rope and therefore loosen the anchor setup.

By clipping a draw into the ring on a Fixe anchor I get a little daydream nightmare about the biner twisting free on the ring. I then clip the draw into the hanger to prevent this nightmare and ease cleaning. Then when I end up cleaning I get the nose of the biner stuck in the hanger and I start swearing really loud. I then rap off and promise myself to bring locking biners to clip the rings next time.

Great poll J-Rock, the proper way to rig anchors for TR, cleaning, and lowering is something I'm hoping the can CAC take a look at and figure out how to educate the masses. I think with proper education people will realize what they are doing, or not doing, and it could save on the replacement and upkeep of top anchors (especially on popular routes).

It never ceases to amaze me that people will top rope directly through the fixed anchor. Usually if you explain how the act of TRing through the anchors prematurly wears out the anchor, and that someone has to come along and replace the anchor then it sinks in and they 'get it'. Its all about the education.

steve, you better post something cause that 666 thing is creepy

Is that all the post I got? Whew, I gotta start wasting more time at work!

Eric wrote:steve, you better post something cause that 666 thing is creepy

I hear ya man....creeeepy. Kinda fits with my past 24 hours, dead possum on my back deck, dead body on New Circle Rd.

1. The rock can fracture in ANY direction. I've seen this happen. This is widely known and easily proven. Placing the anchors in a different horizontal plane does NOT prevent the rock from fracturing in any direction. In soft rock (like the Red) the rock will probably fail long before the bolt will (if placed properly).

2. Chains are fine if they are replaced when they become worn and are equalized properly. However, many of these chains are not rated for more than 2,000 pounds force. I've even seen people using chains that are smaller than 3/8" on top anchors. This is definitely unacceptable.

3. Bolt distances: the anchor bolts should be placed apart from each other a minimum of 2x the length of the bolt. For a 4" bolt this means 8-12". Even with the over under setup there are many that are placed within a distance of <18" to each other. The rock quality is of great importance when deciding proper anchor placement.

4. The rock strata do not always run horizontally or fracture horizontally (especially at the Red).

5. Lowering off of one piece (often a hardware store quick-link) is not the best option. Consider that these pieces are often non-stainless and not rated to much more than 2,000 pounds. Lowering off of one piece WILL prematurely wear out the anchor. Afterall, the rope is rubbing over only one piece so all of the wear and tear is directed onto that one piece. Over time grooves will be worn into it and this will happen at twice the rate if only one ring is used. These will need to be changed more often.

6. The rap rings are large enough to accomodate two biners. Also, it is possible to clip into the biners on one of the quickdraws if needed.

7. I have NEVER heard of a case in which the biner became twisted and opened on its own resulting in a failed attachment on a ring anchor.

We have been working on an anchor database for the entire Red River Gorge area for the last couple of months to keep track of anchor types, anchor placements, worn anchors, replacement dates, etc. We began this project hoping to present it to the CAC. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Eventually (with the help of Ray and Wes) we would love to create a forum specifically dedicated to anchor maintenance at the Red and make this database viewable to the public.

It's times like these that I'm really going to miss Johnny. He knew everything about this kinda stuff and always gave such great input. Sorry about the downer. Just thinking out loud...

J-Rock wrote:We began this project hoping to present it to the CAC. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Eventually (with the help of Ray and Wes) we would love to create a forum specifically dedicated to anchor maintenance at the Red and make this database viewable to the public.

That would be great J. We do have the Fixed Anchor Fourm over at rrgcc.org that would be a great place for people to post the bad, or questionable, bolts and anchors they come across while climbing in the Red.
A d-base of what is out there and when it was last re-equiped would be very handy. It could be hosted here (redriverclimbing) or there (rrgcc.org), either way it is good info to have out there for climbers to see.

Squeezindlemmon has already created a spreadsheet for this project. She will definitely need input from people like Terry Kindred, Scott Hammon, Hugh Loeffler, Tim Powers and others who have replaced countless anchors in the Red. Much of the information she currently has in the spreadsheet as far as anchors (year installed, type, etc.) were taken from John Bronaugh's guidebook. If there is a more suitable format (other than Excel spreadsheet) for the websites then we can make changes as needed. Thanks again. We look forward to all of the help from the climbing community (especially since I haven't made it out of Muir Valley recently).

5. Lowering off of one piece (often a hardware store quick-link) is not the best option. Consider that these pieces are often non-stainless and not rated to much more than 2,000 pounds

My take on this:

We are talking about lowering off top anchors which will not see any dynamic forces, so the 2,000 pound rating on the quick-link is probably well sufficient and underrated. Do you really believe that a tiny aluminum carabiner is stronger than a steel quicklink? I think the makers of quicklinks just don't do as much testing as biner makers do.

I'm not a big fan of the rap rings because as soon as you put yourself on rapel, you have created an "American Death Triangle" with the rope going between both anchors and down to your harness. The forces the anchors are seeing (which are not all that great since you are on rapel and lowering, not falling) are none the less multiplied because of the triangle.

As for the quicklinks not being stainless - lots of anchors in the Red are carbon steel and not stainless. Quicklinks are easily removed and replaced, and they cost $2.50. Everyone should climb with at least one on the back of their harness at all times, just in case you come across one that does need replaceing.

That's how I feel.

Top anchors can and do sometimes receive dynamic forces (especially when shock loaded). Also, after grooves are created in the quicklink the diameter is decreased, the edges become sharper, and the strength is dramatically reduced.

Also, the carabiners are not aluminum and yes they are rated much MUCH stronger than a steel quicklink.

See www.safeclimbing.org for more specific information.

Your idea of carrying a quicklink on your harness in case you come across one that needs replacing is excellent.

For more specific information refer to the "Mountaineering: The Freedom of the Hills" under Static Equalization versus Self-Equalization. It is in the "Climbing Fundamentals" section of the book.